Football Forum | Ticket Forum | Off-Topic Forum | All

lab 7:59 Sun Oct 4
Brendan Rodgers gone

Blimey

, 4:09 Thu Oct 8
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

Sean O'Driscoll has just got the chop and Gary MacAllister has been ousted from first team coach with another role being considered.

Darby_ 4:09 Thu Oct 8
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

The Carefully Chosen One mk 2.

Sven Roeder 4:05 Thu Oct 8
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

All the newspapers now trying to work an amusing headline out of Klopp & Kop.

, 4:04 Thu Oct 8
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

In terms of managerial reputation I think that Klopp has a lot to lose by taking on Liverpool.

Gavros 4:02 Thu Oct 8
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

Confirmed to Sky that he's becoming manager as of tomorrow.

El Scorchio 2:22 Thu Oct 8
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

I hope he is.

:^) 1:26 Thu Oct 8
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

I think Klopp is making a big mistake if he is going there.

El Scorchio 1:21 Thu Oct 8
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

I see Klopp is almost in, already.

This was obviously worked out some time ago, and they were just waiting for the international break for convenience.

Trevor B 9:50 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

Marston Hammer 9:48 Wed Oct 7

Marston Hammer 9:48 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

360,
I'm not sure what shaw was on at southampton, id guess about 20k a week. He's on a reported 120k a week at Man U so they would have had to do a bit better than double his wages to get him to stay.

How much do you think they should have offered him to stay?

Fwiw, I think Southampton have handled their transfers brilliantly. When players have been determined to leave they've made sure clubs have to pay well over the odds to prise them away.

Trevor B 9:41 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

threesixty

players going for a payday in countries like russia and uea are a bit extreme, plus they often arent good enough to attract a top european club anyway, hence why they move, we are talking about players like those that have moved form southampton to clubs that they feel can progress their career, not just for money. look at the amount of players that move to a bit club and then instantly are called up for their national team, for instance.

not quite sure why you're changing your tact on the leeds thing though. one minute you are saying anyone could be another leeds, then citing the reason why they were so different form any other club that has dropped down the division.

anyway, you are wrong on many counts, to suggest that all footballers are motivated only by money is a bit weird when all you do is cite the likes of chris samba and essou-ekotto.

have a nice night.

Tomsdad 9:38 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

Aston Villas new manager!

threesixty 9:30 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

I suppose Chris Samba and all those Brazillians getting bananas chucked at them every week in Russia are doing it for reasons of ambition and not a fuck load of cash??

The reality is most footballers are bored of football by the time they get into their 20's. Most of them have been training and playing all their lives, it's not a novelty anymore and it's just a nice job. I remember the spurs guy Asso-Ekotto did an interview once where he just said he really didnt care about the game that much at all. It was just good money and something he was good at. All this talk of ambition etc.. is just PR talk to make fans think they care.

Admittidely, you get the odd Beckham and Ronaldo who are almost OCD like in their training etc.. but for most it's just a job that pays good money. Getting more money and better contracts is the primarty motivation.

As for the Shaw thing. The opportunity cost is not 50m. Top footballers are not interchangeble. You have to replace Shaw was someone who is as good otherwise, the more you replace "great" with "ok" the more you risk dropping out of the league. The gulf between the championship and the prem especially with the new tv money is ridiculous. YOY the loss would be crazy.

The thing with Shaw and Southampton in general is that they never really bought loads of big players. They have produced these players from practically nothing. So I don't see how doubling the salaries of the better players does anything but increase their chances of making more money as a club. It's very little seed money to gain lots of long term success.

They dont need to increase everybody's salary either, only the good players. If your not so good and you want to double your salary then you can leave. Average players are replaceable. Great players are not. What has selling Bale done for Spurs? Admittedly that was Madrid, but Southampton are selling to Liverpool (no CL).

Now the TV money is coming in we are seeing clubs like Everton hold out because it's actually really not worth it selling your best players all the time.

FInally, the difference between Leeds and Southampton is that Leeds bought alot of their key players at massive prices. Southampton's are home grown mostly. If no one came in for Southamtons players they would still be ok, even if they have no major success. Leeds had to do well. Totally different situations.

Alex V 7:42 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

threesixty 7:16 Wed Oct 7

Leeds are a bad example because of their financial problems - they sold a huge bunch of players, didn't replace them and were relegated. Nobody is arguing that isn't fatal to a club.

This is a slightly flawed hypothetical, but let's say Southampton offered Shaw 50k a week to not join Man Utd. Is that always a massive success? Actually to keep the player is then costing you £50m ish - the £30m opportunity cost of not selling him plus the big contract you've given him. You could actually say that that £50m comes directly out of the funds for improving the squad in future, because it's money you can't spend or wages you can't offer to others because of the change in budget. Just keeping a young player is great and all, but it's a £50m risk gone wrong if he gets a career-threatening injury or just loses his form and motivation (very possible if he's been denied his dream move). Should a club of Southampton's size be committing themselves to £50m risks at this stage in their development? - I highly doubt that's good strategy.

I've got a feeling Southampton consider their 7th place finish and Europa League place earned last season to actually be success. Only 4 points off 5th - they were probably a bit disappointed not to finish higher. Their recent policies have been a massive success so far.

Trevor B 7:28 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

threesixty

if money was the main motivation then clubs would just keep offering more money and player would stay, the fact is that the biggest clubs can also offer them more than money, hence why they move. for some its the kudos of playing for a real madrid or a man utd, for others its the lure of playing regularly in europe, and then there's the thought that players at bigger clubs get called up to their national team more. and if you thikn that players dont want to win trophies, then you really are deluded mate.

as for leeds, you really are showing yourself up now. when leeds went down they had 8 first teeam players in on loan because they had sold so many to balance the books and couldnt afford to spend the money on buying anyone.

what destroyed leeds was the lack of champions league football, that is well documented and you can easily read a lot about it anywhere on the net. they missed out on the huge money offered one season, had to sell some players, that then caused o'learly to leave and ridsdale then set about paying the loans back by selling more and more player, even offloading robbie fowler to man city whilst leeds stil paid half his wages because they were THAT desperate to save money. the loans they took out listed the players they bought as collateral and when those loans were called in the players had to be sold.

feel free to educate yourself about the whole affair mate.

Marston Hammer 7:23 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

threesixty 7:16 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

If you double one or two players wages to get them to stay what do you think will happen with the rest of the squad?

threesixty 7:16 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

I disagree.
Money is always the main motivation. If you double someone's salary they will stay. It's amazing how many players who talk about "ambition" seem to stay when you offer them another 30k a week.

You also have to factor agents and families into the equation as well. There are a lot of people who are eating off the salary of that 1 player. They want him to be earning as much as he can.


So with that said, keeping players is about offering them a financial reason to stay first , and then a footballing one. The money Southampton have been drawing in could easily do that.

So the issue is, what is success to Southampton FC? If it's just staying in the league then that's fine. But in this league if you are not moving forward you are going backwards. Other clubs are buying players and improving so you must do the same just to tread water. I just think it's risky to assume that a) you'll always be able to develop or buy great player and b) you'll always have a top manager.

What I mean by it;s easy to be Leeds is that Leeds went down with a pretty good squad. A lack of top flight football with all the money that brings is what destroyed them. They could have kept the mortgage payments going if they were in the top flight.

But ultimately is was bad football that relegated them. And nothing insures you against bad football than having as many good players as you can. So continually selling really doesn't make financial sense as business move.

Trevor B 6:50 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

Also, if a players wants to go, how easy is it for any but the very top clubs to play that sort of hardball and the player eventually stays and is happy? even at the top clubs that rarely happens if a player really wants out.

Alex V 6:49 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

>>> I dont understand that club. What is the point? I understand being a selling club if you're in some crap league like Holand (i.e. Ajax), but here?

If you sell your car for double what it's worth, you can shop wisely to end up with a better one. Southampton debatably wouldn't have the likes of Pelle and Mane if they hadn't sold the likes of Lallana etc. I don't think their intention is to be purely a 'selling club' - it's more a question of looking at the options and making the best one for the future of the club.

I consider 'selling' to be generally a neutral transfer decision. If it's done well it should take a club forward, if it's done badly it takes a club backward. If you simply refuse to sell then half of the benefits of transfer strategy itself are simply unavailable to your club. It would probably be fatal over time, because you'd never generate extra funds or simply the chance to make good transfer decisions that might improve your squad.

Trevor B 6:24 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

" If they sell any more its all over. Anyone can be another Leeds, anyone.2

Missed this bit. Sorry mate but that quote makes you sound like you have no idea what happened at Leeds. Leeds borrowed massively against their future success and revenue. The reason they HAD to sell their players was because they missed out on the riches of the CL and could no longer afford the huge payments and interest that their massive spending had incurred.

But, as you say (although not meaning it in this context), ANYONE could be another Leeds. An that is pretty much why FFP has been put in place to avoid.

Trevor B 6:21 Wed Oct 7
Re: Brendan Rodgers gone

"The first lot of sales should have been used to improve the contracts of the players left. Most are going because of money not because of some dying ambition to sit on the bench at a big club.2

No, most will go because of money AND ambition. They want to play with the best players in Europe and play for their national team. You are sadly deluded if you think money is the sole reason why players move, even though I'm sure it makes you feel better about modern footballers to think so.

Page 1 - Next